Pro-Gun Gay Groups Take Aim at Hate Crimes Bill

By
Tuesday, June 09, 2009 at 6:00 am
Courtesy of: pinkpistols.org

Courtesy of: pinkpistols.org and olegvolk.net

One month after successfully tucking an amendment into the credit card reform bill that expanded gun rights, a small number of Senate Republicans are looking at the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act as another chance to score a victory for the Second Amendment. The possible plan — to add an amendment that would allow gun owners to carry their weapons from one state to another in accordance with concealed carry laws. The possible rationale — to defend gay rights.

“It makes sense for a group of people who would be protected by hate crime legislation to support something that would let them defend themselves before or after the crime,” said one Republican Senate aid familiar with the discussions. “It’s relevant, and we want to work together with gay groups to get the message out.”

Image by: Matt Mahurin

Image by: Matt Mahurin

While the aide described the discussions over a gun rights amendment to the hate crimes bill as “very fluid,” conservative and pro-gun rights gay groups outside of the Senate are ready to make a real push for it. GOProud, a new gay rights group that broke away from the Log Cabin Republicans in April, has talked with top staffers for Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) about how to make the civil rights case for conceal and carry reciprocity.

“We support this because we think it’s advantageous to make it legal and relatively easy for gay people to arm themselves so they can protect themselves,” said Jimmy LaSilva, who became the executive director of GOProud after three years working on policy for the Log Cabin Republicans. “In the next few weeks we want to start highlighting some of those stories. There are people who have averted gay bashings because of their ability to use guns.”

LaSilva and GOProud are currently putting together the names of some of those people. They’re collecting their statements for the first rock-solid deadline in the push for concealed carry reciprocity — a June 23 hearing that came together as a result of a previous Thune gun rights bill. In February, Thune and Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) offered similar amendments to legislation that would extend a vote in Congress to residents of Washington, D.C. Both amendments would have legalized gun ownership in the district. Ensign’s passed, and Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.) and Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) approached Thune on the floor to offer a hearing on conceal and carry reciprocity instead of a protracted fight on his D.C. gun rights amendment.

“Everyone here is focused on that hearing,” said Kyle Downey, a spokesman for Thune. “It’s too early to talk about the chances of this as a separate bill or as an amendment, but getting the commitment from Leahy on a hearing was quite a victory in and of itself.”

The hate crimes bill was sponsored by Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) and is supported by a range of minority rights groups. The senator’s office and the gay rights group Human Rights Campaign did not comment on this potential amendment when contacted by TWI.

Liberal opponents of Coburn and other Republicans criticized last month’s amendment to the credit card bill that legalized the possession of loaded weapons in national parks. The National Rifle Association and other gun rights groups pushed back hard against the argument that Coburn’s amendment had been irrelevant, or that it had been passed as a trick. At the time, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence called the amendment “reckless and extraneous,” while NRA executive vice president Wayne LaPierre argued that the vote was bipartisan and proved “there is broad and bipartisan support for the Second Amendment in Congress.”

Supporters of concealed carry reciprocity argue that the case for attaching it to a hate crimes bill — if that is the way that it can be passed — makes even more sense than the case for Coburn’s amendment. “Plenty of people have used guns to defend innocent people,” argued Second Amendment scholar and attorney David Kopel, “including crimes motivated by bias. This is a legitimate thing to attach to any bill that’s concerned with violent crime.”

Courtesy of: pinkpistols.org

Courtesy of: pinkpistols.org and olegvolk.net

That’s the case being made by Pink Pistols, a gay gun rights organization whose slogan is “Armed Gays Don’t Get Bashed,” and whose members can recount stories of fending off potential attackers by brandishing their weapons.

“Self-defense with a firearm is a valid and viable method of self-defense and protection,” said Gwen Patton, a spokesperson for Pink Pistols. “Imagine that individuals follow you from a place known in the neighborhood as a GLBT gathering place. They follow you to your car, and when you try to open the door, they hold out pipes and yell — ‘Hey, faggot!’ You pull out a concealed weapon that you have a license to carry. They say, ‘He’s got a gun!’ They drop their pipes and run away. No shots were fired, but a beating was just averted.”

Still, it’s not yet clear whether Thune and his allies will have to go this route to pass concealed carry legislation. It’s still possible that a new hate crimes law will be be folded into the defense authorization for 2009, which would effectively remove it from the amendment process. Thune’s most recent version of the legislation, S. 845, still could be introduced on its own for an up-or-down vote. But only one Democrat, Sen. Mark Begich (D-Alaska) has co-sponsored the bill, and Thune’s spokesman Downey worried that “the political side” of the Democratic Party would keep it from coming to a vote. “As we get closer to the election,” said Downey, “they will want to avoid these types of tough votes.”

If they do go the amendment route, supporters of concealed carry reciprocity are confident that it would be passed as part of a hate crimes bill, and not become a poison pill that kills the entire package. “Every Republican senator is on the record with a position on hate crimes legislation,” said GOProud’s LaSilvia. “If this were to be attached, a vote for the bill could be explained as a vote for concealed carry. Gosh — what would happen when the Family Research Council realized that their people were voting for the ‘gay bill?’ It would put a bunch of people in a really weird position. It would be fun to watch.”

Follow David Weigel on Twitter


Comments

164 Comments

Dan Nafe
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 5:01 am

Strange bedfellows, indeed.


ajm8127
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 5:25 am

I don't even know where to start but I will say this, if Republicans are so worried about minorities and protecting people from hate crimes then i guess its cool to them if American Muslims and people of color walk around with concealed, loaded weapons too. I wonder what MLK would think about this…


Beef Casserole » Pro-Gun Gay Groups Take Aim at Hate Crimes Bill Criminal News Stories
Pingback posted June 9, 2009 @ 7:00 am

[...] Pro-Gun Gay Groups Take Aim at Hate Crimes Bill The Washington Independent – Washington,DC,USA ?It makes sense for a group of people who would be protected by hate crime legislation to support something that would let them defend themselves before or … See all stories on this topic [...]


Dan
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 6:30 am

” Republicans are so worried… “

I am not a Republican, but I will speak for them to this point:

They would be cool with all people walking around with concealed, loaded weapons.

The constitution applies to all citizens.

Remember it was a Republican president that made the proclimation of emancipation.

MLK hired groups of armed “Deacons” to provide security during many of his meetings.


Geoff
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 7:52 am

More republican insanity.


Geoff
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 7:53 am

More Republican insanity.


Lazercat
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 8:04 am

Now there is an untapped market. Great Job NRA.


susan
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 8:11 am

i have always said this, and as a lesbian, i have indeed literally saved my partner's life with a gun in a situation where no amount of screaming or speed-dialing would have worked. a basher yanked her right off the front step of our apartment in Atlanta, she managed to eek out a muffled scream of my name, i grabbed the gun out from its daytime resting place under the couch where we sat during the day (it was locked up when we were out of the house) to find her being dragged by the neck around the side of our building in an urban area which, ironically, is the very type of area guns are typically banned yet the ones who need them the most and which was why i bought the gun in the first place. the moment he saw the gun he dropped her and ran. our neighbor said afterward he'd been around earlier saying he was gonna “kill someone today” but didn't take him seriously enough to warn us. so although it wasn't necessarily a hate crime, it was a hulking man attacking a small woman, who broke off the attack when confronted with “the great equaliser”.

so, the gun did more for women's / gay's equality that day than any after-the-fact punishments for hate could have. it saved her life, at a time when i wasn't politically active and had assumed “gun control” was a Repub issue, them being tyrants and all, come to find my own party was behind the effort, which floored me, the Left being as it always has been the defender of equality and “people power”, not authoritarianism and people-cowing, and i've been railing against the plank ever since.

so, as a lifelong liberal who stood on SF street corners registering people to vote for Clinton in 1992 and held my nose for Obama this year despite his position on this most dear-to-me issue, i'm here to say, we've got this one wrong, people, we need to get on the right side of it- no pun intended.

Dan Nafe's right, gay/minority 2A advocates do indeed have strange bedfellows on this issue, and i'd much prefer to be sleeping in my own bed but have been unceremoniously kicked out of it by my own compatriots, in this case into the waiting arms of the dreaded Repubs. i don't vote for them, but the Left's tude toward the thing which is responsible for my partner still being among the living makes it mighty tempting sometimes, and it's only their utter obscenity on almost every other civil liberties issue that prevents it. so basically my Dem votes these days aren't so much pro-dem as they are anti-Repub. sad, and it ll began with Clinton, the man i worked so tirelessly to help elect (thanks for “don't ask don't tell” as well, babe..).

so i think this amendment is *totally* in keeping with the spirit of this legislation and support it 100%. power to LGBT's, power to Muslim Americans and people of colour, power to *the people*.. the rights of whom to keep and bear arms shall NOT be infringed on my watch, babydolls..


Marie
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 8:11 am

Gay bashers promoting gay rights. Hypocrites!


Michael
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 8:13 am

How odd. It is very likely…no, probable…that a gay man who is bashed and shoots his attackers is likely shooting one or more members of the Republican Party.

But go for it GOPers.


Marie
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 8:23 am

You've got that right!


Candace
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 8:24 am

I don't think Republicans would support this. How could they kill a queer for Christ if they arm the queer?


PopeRatzo
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 8:30 am

I finally figured out how to stop the NRA and other 2nd amendment “advocates” in their tracks. I just tell them that I'm part of an organization that provides firearm training and safety classes to inner city youth.

You wanna see a gun nut swallow his snuff, give it a try.


Hammerlock
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 8:34 am

On the one hand, I have to agree that it is prudent for groups subject to violent oppression and hateful acts to protect themselves.

On the other, this is like saying “distribute nuclear weapons to prevent war”–most sane people would avoid it, but all it takes is an overly-scared, or vindictive, or desperate, or less-informed armed person and you've got a bodycount where it might not have been warranted–and Fox “News” gets the vapors about rabid gay gangs with guns.

This seems to be just another example of republican hypocrisy re: state's rights. They're all for “smaller federal gov't and allowing states to decide for themselves”–but now is one state going to have to respect the concealed carry rules of another? What if a guy travels from a state that allows a gun in the car to one where its required to be locked up in the trunk, unloaded? Will the state that's decided to tightly restrict gun access have to acquiesce?

I'm a gun owner; I keep mine for home defense and target shooting. I hope to never have to use it against a living target, though I recognize the potential need to. That said, the use of this argument to transparently attempt to pander to LGBT-sympathetic legislators is a bit reckless and of questionable relevance.


Avi
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 8:37 am

Interesting that Republicans want your concealed carry permit to work across state lines but not your marriage.


Pat
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 8:37 am

I am sure there is a Christian message here somewhat. As you sow, so shall you weep. I guess this is the most violent Christian society in the world. As for me and mine, we will continue to trust in the Lord.


romi
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 8:39 am

Susan,

I wished you'd had the presence of mind to grab your video camera as well when you went for your gun. Had you pointed the camera at him first and got on tape what he was doing, then pulled out your pistol and shot the F*((&^%$))^%$ing freak I doubt there'd be a redneck jury in the land who wouldn't say “Atta girl!”

Guess we need guns with video cameras built in for real protection. Wait! We already have phones with cameras. We just need them to be able to fire bullets. But wait! What if that redneck jury actually is full of gay bashers and sees the basher you shot as one of their heroes?!!


tonyspdx
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 8:39 am

People of color and Muslim American already carry legally, along with Asian Americans, Native Americans, gay or straight, all kinds. People who are not exposed to concealed carry have to remember that outside of your little neighborhoods, 1 in 60 people are concealed carry license holders in the US and that number increases every day. Look into a crowd and you will probably see a person legally carrying a hand gun. Those people are the ones that will come to help when you need someone.


Norman Klein
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 8:49 am

But wouldn't a dog have also prevented this attack from occurring? What if you shot and accidentally hit your partner? Who would be at fault in that situation? A gun just isn't an appropriate defense


Mark
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 9:05 am

I've long been a democrat and I've voted in every election since 1976 when I turned 18, but I'm a moderate and a pragmatist. The left would outlaw handguns entirely and make true that trite old cliché about “when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns,” whereas the right is unwilling to accept reasonable constraints on gun ownership and use.

Having said that, I am for concealed carry reciprocity. Those who say guns are inappropriate for personal defense have obviously never had to defend themselves or others around them. The concealed carry licensing process is designed to ensure people know when it is legally appropriate to use a gun and requires and extensive background check to ensure the wrong people are licensed.


Jimm
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 9:06 am

republicans are so hypocritical – it is evident in everything they do.


Beverly
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 9:21 am

This must be an NRA solution because it opens the door for arming
1) women against abusive men
2) children against pedophiles and abusive parents
3) Blacks and other “minorities” against rabit, violent racist Whites
4) Muslims and other assumed to be threatening religious people against Christian right zealots
5) Pro-abortion “liberal” Democrats against Pro-war Republican “right-wingers”
6) Same-Sex advocates against heterosexual ethnocentrists
7) The poor and oppressed who are losing their homes and food against the unjusts captains of banking and industry (including the drug lords)
8) Inner-city angry youths (of all races) against “the world”
Everyone will have a gun and the NRA will be rich and powerful beyond expectations as “we the people” come after them WITH A GUN.


Doug
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 9:27 am

This is an interesting bill as it shows the hypocrisy of both sides when it comes to states rights and Federalism. Dems want states rights to ban guns but want to push gay marriage on to all states. The Republicans want states rights to ban gay marriage but push gun rights to all states.


Ron
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 9:28 am

That's terrific. The Republicans are telling me I can shoot anyone who wants to bash my head in because they're a raging closeted homosexual (thats what gay bashers are). Interesting concept I must say.


Tracy
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 9:29 am

This smells a lot like a diversion tactic, an attempt to pacify with a gun rather than give what is really wanted and rightfully deserved. Having the right to bear arms still does grant one full and equal citizenship rights, still will not permit gays and lesbians to marry. A gun works perfectly, if the person who intends to do you harm also doesn't have one. However, how often does a basher show up without a weapon? Don't get distracted by shiny things.


DaProf
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 9:30 am

I find it interesting the hate here for Republicans and Christians….I wonder it they will be protected under the proposed legislation.

I think the intent of both the Bill and the Amendment is good.

Empower people to protect themselves, whether gay or republican, or even if gay and republican.

Power to the People.


Tracy
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 9:30 am

Exactly!


sylhines
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 9:41 am

We need sensible and responsible legislation on the economy, the wars, the deficit, health care among other pressing public needs. This effort to confuse and highjack the legislative process for pro-gun issues is a complete waste of time. The GOP and gun rights advocates have long used such tatics without any accountability. The voters are wiser at this point to the blocking and stalling tactics in lieu of any substantive policy initatives by the special interest groups. There will be widespread voter rejections of these disingenious political moves. I bet the GOP will lose more members in 2010 playing this wasteful and dangerous game. I know money talks, but this is foolish even if the NRA wants it.


maz
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 9:44 am

Also arms abusive men against women,
violent racist whites against everybody,
Christian right zealots against everybody,
pro-war Republican right wingers against everybody,

and increases number of accidental deaths and suicides.

Oh yes, I'll feel ever so much safer if this passes.


guest
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 9:54 am

The moment the first gay person pulls a gun and actually shoots an attacker whether the situation justifies it or not, that incident will become the banner necessary to set gay rights back 100 years.


Michael
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 9:54 am

Doesnt this destroy the sanctity of gun ownership.


Dr. Francis Coila
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 10:01 am

I WELCOME THE FUTURE WHEN most of these racist and bigoted Republicans will be dead and hopefully their offspring will have had some education and awareness to renew the Republican base on something besides fear and intimidation and religion.


jbj
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 10:02 am

Norman,

Are you saying that having a gun in this situation didn't save a life because you don't want it to?

What if the situation was like the one recently when a deranged man hacked a baby to death with a cleaver while the mother and bystanders fought in vain to stop the attack? The baby died and several people were seriously wounded. “What if” I was there with my gun?

The “what-if's” stopped when everything worked out for the best.

Oh, by the way, I'm a life-long Dem, a gay rights supporter, and gun owner.


sabio
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 10:08 am

What Dems are pushing for gay marriage on all the states? None that I have seen. There is no legislation being pursued to legalize it nationally and few Democratic leaders even support gay marriage as a concept (opting for civil unions instead).


Lav.Piss
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 10:15 am

Why don't we replace beating with bullets ? So instead, the gay guy will get shot and killed while reaching for his own gun. Yeah, totally smart bill.


A.J.
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 10:15 am

Reminder!!!
The 2nd Amendment is for us to be ARMED, in case we need to defend ourselves from our government.


analogphotog
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 10:18 am

“Imagine that individuals follow you from a place known in the neighborhood as a GLBT gathering place. They follow you to your car, and when you try to open the door, they hold out pipes and yell — ‘Hey, faggot!’ You pull out a concealed weapon that you have a license to carry. They say, ‘He’s got a gun!’ They drop their pipes and run away. No shots were fired, but a beating was just averted.”

This is an example of what we might call thematic or metaphorical thinking. A critical look at this scenario shows some big flaws, starting with “They drop their pipes and run away.” It could just as easily be, in reality, “They drop their pipes and pull out their own guns.” Or “They fan out and become multiple moving targets that one individual with a handgun, under intense emotional and tactical pressure, could not possibly defend against.” Or “They keep hold of their pipes and move in when the gun misfires and jams.”

When you pull out a gun, you alter the calculus of any tactical situation in ways that can harm you as easily as benefit you. It does not confer control.

The ideal solution is probably impossible — eliminate hate and violence. A practicable solution might be ad hoc civilian security for groups that are targets of hate crimes — vigilance, organization and cooperation in the face of criminal activity. How negligent are “GLBT gathering places” that allow security infractions within the perimeter of their scope of operation, including parking lots where their patrons leave their cars?

In any event, the flawed emotional arguments raised in support of the legislation have nothing to do with the actual issue of concealed carry reciprocity, which may not, in fact, turn out to be properly resolved at the federal level.


Kiki
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 10:20 am

People the republican party has no love for the Gay Community, the African/American Community, the Hispanic Community, the Asian Community (well I guess that covers the entire U.S). Their love is for themselves. We need tougher gun control. Without that we will have more deaths due to hate crimes etc.


Dead Parrot
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 10:20 am

I don't think there isn't anything the gun nuts don't believe that more guns isn't the cure for. So now Gays will be able to shoot and kill deranged conservatives that threaten and assault them? Doesn't that decrease the numbers of “The Republican Base?”


Cappy
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 10:31 am

The Christian message here is “He who lives by the gun shall die by the gun”.


whtnow
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 10:33 am

There are more guns now then in the past yet there are lower murders, one not thousands of christain zealots killing others, no white racist committing genocide in America, GOP at war that Obama first condemned but continues the same policy. Accidental gun deaths according to the NSC is down 95% SINCE 1905.


b_le_roux
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 10:34 am

Hey everyone…. lets fight violence with more violence… give every gay a gun… thats sure to solve all the gay bashing problems


E.T.
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 10:34 am

If the GOP is so serious in protecting gay rights how about tacking this legislation on to another that legalizes gay marriage.


dhard
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 10:35 am

The MLK comparison is misleading to say the least. His life was in constant threat, he had been attacked by a knife wielding assailant, and ultimately he was assassinated.

You cannot compare MLK to your average “citizen”.


whtnow
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 10:40 am

I lived in the Bay Area and lived in a small northern California town. Any where you find a large group of youg men grouping who are into gangs don't like gays. I've seen minority groups and individuals attack gays also. To group only the GOP as gay attackers shows political leaning or lack of world experience.


roald
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 10:50 am

Or they come looking for you later when they are able to overcome you even though you are armed and the weapon is used against you.


dhard
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 10:51 am

Repugnicans: What they SAY vs. What they MEAN

1. Smaller Government = Big Contractors (small gov must outsource services to contractors. Repugs own the big contracting companies).
2. Gun Rights = protection from already illegally armed Blacks (armed of course to facilitate “genocide by fratricide” approach to population control of “undesirables”).
3. Right to Life = Make more white babies (paranoia caused by a downward trend in Euro birthrates).
4. Anti-Gay = Make more white babies (Gay people cannot procreate. See notes in point #3).

It is all so clear!!!


Jo
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 10:55 am

lmao


Tom
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 11:09 am

The bashers don't drop the pipes and run away.

Guns will have become completely accessible and ubiquitous in the US through dropping all gun gun c control. Guns are cheap and plentiful for both lawful citizens, and even more so for criminals.

The criminals and now just escalate to their concealed weapons.

You now get shot from 4 directions instead of just threatened with pipes you could drive away from with some broken windows.

End of gun-obsessed fantasy scenario.


FZFAN
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 11:23 am

If any of the people on this comment thread actually shot and killed someone, they would realize that there is a WHOLE lot more to it than pointing and shooting. You could educate yourselves on the gun laws in your state (“castle door defense”) but nothing, NOTHING prepares you for taking the life of a walking, talking, living, breathing person.

NOTHING.


RugerNiner
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 11:24 am

Armed straight Republicans don't get Bashed!


'Conceal and Carry' Provision added to the Matthew Shepherd Bill?
Pingback posted June 9, 2009 @ 12:28 pm

[...] and Carry’ Provision added to the Matthew Shepherd Bill? Strange freaking bedfellows…. Senate GOPers: Loosen Gun Laws To Defend Gay Rights Pro-Gun Gay Groups Take Aim at Hate Crimes Bill Second Amendment GLBT Groups Press for ‘Conceal [...]


liberaldemdave
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 11:30 am

Christians (actually all faiths) are already protected under the current hate crimes legislation.

Why don't you try removing the log from your eye before trying to remove the splinter from others'.

Respectfully,

A Christian who also, just so happens to be Gay.


IKnowWhoUAre
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 11:31 am

I find it interesting that Republicans and Christians are the only group that (a) must have guns, many guns, and can never ever ever have enough of them and that (b) these are the ONLY two groups in the nation that oppose gay rights by invoking myths and lies.

I find that very interesting. Now, go figure why those groups are regularly singled out as the worst two groups of people in America. Go figure.


Ajax
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 11:33 am

Slightly off-topic, but Dhard posted that “gay people can't procreate” …

1. They don't have to, heterosexual people do procreate and a small percentage of their children are gay.

2. Gays and lesbian can procreate just fine with a little science, imagination, the old school way, or with a turkey baster. Many gays and lesbians are raising children from previous “heterosexual” relationships and many in homosexual relationships can and do find ways to have children. It might shock you to find out that the majority of those children tend to be hetersexual just like the majority of the population.

Just sayin' …


dhard
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 11:34 am

I have always been baffled about the amount of available weapons that are available in the inner-city; how do these guys get these guns. There are roughly 26 MSA (major cities) in the US and each has an average of 300 homicide per year (for the past 3 decades at least). If you say that each homicide = one gun (often the case); how many unaccounted for guns are out there. Are most stolen? WTF???!!???

Of course this is just a small sample of the population. I do wonder why we haven't address the “supply-side” issue of this matter. Should the gun industry/manufacturers be held accountable to some degree for not addressing this obvious problem? Micro-chip technology should enable at least better tracking of these guns (LoJack chip attached to a mechanism that makes the gun operate and if removed makes the gun inoperative).


Bbydn
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 11:36 am

I can accept that premise. Straight Republicans are hard to find.


analogphotog
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 11:37 am

I think he's saying that the introduction of a gun into a complex equation does not guarantee a predictable outcome, and can create different and undesirable outcomes. Susan's situation is a single event in which, thankfully, the introduction of a gun worked out for the best. As for your “What if” question, there are a number of different answers, none of which guarantees the outcome of “baby saved.” Factors of perpetrator's intent, focus, lead time and efficiency combine with factors of your reaction time under unanticipated stress, weapons skill variables, and an unpredictable field of fire created by a panicked crowd are things you would have to consider before you could say with any certainty that the actual outcome would resemble that of the action hero movie you are imagining.


dhard
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 11:39 am

True but under the “abopt a child” scenario is simply circulating the child; it is not producing a new one. Also the gay couple adopting or having children is such a small percentage — I don't see how this would nullify my argument.

Have you notice the close correlation between extreme anti-abortion movement and the white supremacist agenda. In most cases these people are part of the very same organizations?


Strange Bedfellows 2009 « Face to Face Talking
Pingback posted June 9, 2009 @ 12:47 pm

[...] Pro-Gun Gay Groups Take Aim at Hate Crimes Bill [...]


James
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 11:49 am

The people carrying guns had better know the laws concerning use of force. Just because someone scorns a gay person is not sufficient reason to pull a gun. I carry a gun. I am straight. Carrying a gun also brings lots of responsibility and defending your right to be gay is not a reason to even let a gun be shown, let alone brandish or point it at another person merely because of words thrown.


Senate GOP and Gay Groups Team Up for Gun Rights :: Elites TV
Pingback posted June 9, 2009 @ 12:49 pm

[...] for adding it to the hate-crimes bill: concealed carry will help people defend against gay bashing. David Weigel at the Washington Independent reports: “It makes sense for a group of people who would be [...]


Matt
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 12:00 pm

-dhard,

Firstly, I wouldn't want uncle sam to know about all of the guns I own…because then it'd only be a matter of time before some wildly popular and very radical president, coupled with a congress that doesn't even bother to read the bills they pass passed some legislation that would, for all intents and purposes, make it impossible for me to legally own a weapon, and then, because they knew I owned those guns, I would have to give them up. Secondly, Any sort of microchip, microstamp, smartgun tech is inevitably going to adversely effect the reliability of the firearm by making it more complicated than necesssary (do some research and you'll find that the most successfull and reliable firearm designs are also coincidentally the most simple. Think AK-47 or M1911. Anyone familiar with an M-2 browning will tell you a six year old could maintain and operate it….it's been in service since WW1, with no plans to replace it). Anyone with an IQ above 6 whose being honest will tell you that the more complicated a thing is, the more likely it is to fail. If you think I'm lying, then why do you think that the microstamp and smartgun requirment laws do not apply to police departments?

As for wether the companies should be held accountable….if you sell me a car, in compliance with all local, state, and federal laws, then I get drunk and get into a terrible wreck with a full school bus, from which there are no survivors….should you be held accountable? According to the people who would hold the gun companies available, the answer is, inevitably, yes.

The reality is that the criminals who commit major and heinous crimes, such as rape or murder, aren't even going to bat their eyes at a little thing like stealing a firearm.


Matt
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 12:04 pm

Actually, the sound of my house being broken into would have me fully prepared to take a human life. Multiple human lives, by an means necessary, actually. If you want to see what kind of evil a man is truly capable of, put his wife and children behind him and don't leave him a way out.


DaProf
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 12:08 pm

It is interesting to read here all the people who have opinions, but can't really cite stats or research about gun ownership. The research is there, from a variety of sources, that show gun ownership and concealed carry do not result in more crime or lawless behavior.

Check out http://www.gunfacts.info for researched and cited studies from governmental and other agencies about the real facts of guns in America.

No more “what if”, and “I think” and “I believe” ….how about using some real facts and real research to calm your gun phobias.

I used to think that guns were bad, if you really want to know. Then I did some research, did some learning and came to the conclusion that guns aren't bad. But they do help prevent bad things from happening to good people.


Jesus Jefferson
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 12:11 pm

Great work. The more guns in the hands of law abiding citizens – the lower the overall crime rate, let alone the lower the attacks on homosexuals.

This is good news.

There is a reason why cities (with their endless gun control laws) have experienced outrageously high crime rates. If guns are outlawed only outlaws have guns.

Then there is the Constitution as well. Never mind the fact that only Vermont follows the Constitution and allows concealed carry w/o a permit.

“Shall not be infringed.”

Molon Labe.


Paul
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 12:11 pm

HA!


keeblerelves
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 12:12 pm

The government tells you who you can hate. It is a crime to hate women, ethnic minorities, non-heterosexuals, and religious people. It is not a crime to hate white men. I love you, Big Sister.


James
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 12:12 pm

Alaska allows it too.


ScottLanter
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 12:21 pm

This is a genius strategy to sink this absurd legislation, characterized by Andrew Sullivan as “boutique legislation” which sole purpose is to enrich elite liberal homosexual groups. GOProud is to be commended for throwing this back in the face of liberals and guaranteeing the defeat of this special rights bills. Who says as Conservative gays we don't have anything in common with Tony Perkins?


nicki
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 12:56 pm

It is a provision that would make a hate crimes bill really effective. After all, a Colt 45 1911 pistol has a 1 to 3 second response time depending on how fast someone can draw and shoot. That beats 911.


christopher
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 1:03 pm

this stupid country is circling the drain. this crap bill is at the top of the agenda?

nero fiddled……..while rome burned !


Cryos
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 1:07 pm

According to evolutionary theory, any homosexual genes that might have ever theoretically existed should have been wiped out over the millions of years it took to get us where we are. After all, if you're homosexual, you're not likely to be producing very many children to carry on that gene, and over such an extensive period of time, it would be all but eliminated.

The only other theory I can think of is that the gene is something akin to a birth defect, and it's borderline sacrilidge to make that assumption.

Or, perhaps it's not genetic at all, but simply a sexual preference, akin to S&M or other deviances from the acceptable sexual norm.


Liza
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 1:16 pm

Gays dont effin carry guns. What is wrong with you people? Gay bashers will be more likely to take advantage of this bill. So now instead of gays being bashed they are being shot by people legally allowed to carry concealed weapons. I D I O T S


FA
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 1:21 pm

I hate hate crimes legislation. It is stupid, imprecise and duplicative. You are asking a judge or jury to determine what is in a person's heart. Apply and enforce the laws we have.

On the other hand, I completely agree that everyone, LGBT or not, should have portability of concealed carry across states. Under an accurate and historical application of the 14th Amendment, the 2nd Amendment applies to the States (see Halbrook, 'Freedman, The 14th Amendment and the right to keep and bear arms, 1866-76' or read the article http://snipr.com/jse2t by Halbrook).


Senate Republicans Back Gay Gunslingers « Daily Dose
Pingback posted June 9, 2009 @ 2:40 pm

[...] Republicans Back Gay Gunslingers The Washington Independent reports (via HuffPo) that Senate Republicans are considering trying a new formulation of the “Guns [...]


“Armed Gays Don’t Get Bashed” - The Sexist - Washington City Paper
Pingback posted June 9, 2009 @ 4:11 pm

[...] shit these people come up with. In a bizarre opposite marriage of viewpoints, The Washington Independent is reporting that “a small number of Senate Republicans” [...]


FZFAN
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 3:43 pm

Just so you know, I have 3 handguns. My statement isn't hypothetical. I just don't like the “make-believe” way many people approach this. My friends in LE agree.


Umm
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 3:49 pm

Hate Crimes legislation provides additional funding for states when prosecuting hate motivated crimes.

You should also do some research on hate crimes cases throughout the US. While the few that are ambiguous have been blown up by conservatives an overwhelming majority involves groups harming/murdering an individual after finding out they were gay or calling them slurs as they beat them.


Umm
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 3:53 pm

Alright, you're an idiot.

Hate Crimes legislation currently covers ANY attack based on RACE. It doesn't list specific races.

Go do some research before you embarrass yourself some more.


Umm
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 3:55 pm

Ohhhh man this Guy Smith (writer, songwriter, political provocateur) is quite the source of infomation!


DaProf
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 4:06 pm

Ah, Ummm, the Anonymous one…

Can't refute what he states and what is cited in the study…just have to jump into the old “ad-hominem” routine, don't you.

Or are you just trying to use Alinsky's rule #5: Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It’s hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.

Too bad; so sad.

But


Rick
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 4:46 pm

Way off topic… but, you don't know what you are talking about. People are perfectly capable of passing on genes when they themselves don't exhibit the characteristics of that gene. Just as it is possible to pass on the gene for blue eyes when you have brown eyes, it would be perfectly possible for a heterosexual to pass on a gene for homosexuality. I'm not saying there is definitely a gene that causes our sexuality, but I think it is likely, and I do know that your argument has no value.


Eamon
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 4:50 pm

So one GOP group wants guns to protect themselves from other GOP members.


mlmn08
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 7:28 pm

Sure thing, let's just arm everyone and let the best aim win.


Daniel
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 7:52 pm

We aren't asking to carry guns so we can wave them around whenever someone says something we find offensive.
We need a way to defend ourselves from the hate this world has for gay people. The hate that drives people to rape, murder or harm other people.
Do you think that if Matthew Shepard had a gun on him, that he would still be alive?

We aren't defending our right to be gay with guns. We are defending our right to be treated as a human beings.


8-Ball
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 10:19 pm

For someone who is fairly harsh on people for not doing their research, it appears that you have done little regarding this issue.

Start here:
FBI STUDY CONFIRMING GUN LAWS IGNORED BY COP KILLERS AND CRIMINALS NOW AVAILABLE
The FBI recently completed a major study of shootings of police officers. Titled 'Violent Encounters: Felonious Assaults on America's Law Enforcement Officers.' Since its publication, the existence of the damning report on the five-year study by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) about how cop-killing criminals ignore gun laws, and where they get their guns, has not been publicized. Calgunlaws.com has one of the first copies of the report obtained publicly.

The existence of the report was first discovered by self defense civil rights activists in January 2007 when it was mentioned in a law enforcement newsletter. According to the December 28, 2006 issue of Force Science News, the FBI research focused on 40 incidents involving assaults or deadly attacks on police officers, in which all but one of the guns involved had been obtained illegally, and none were obtained from gun shows.
The Force Science News is published by the Force Science Research Center, a non-profit institution based at Minnesota State University in Mankato. The newsletter quotes Ed Davis, an FBI Criminal Investigative Instructor, who told the International Association of Chiefs of Police that none of these criminals who attacked police officers was 'hindered by any law – federal, sate or local – that has ever been established to prevent gun ownership. They just laughed at gun laws.' The newsletter also stated, 'In contrast to media myth, none of the firearms in the study was obtained from gun shows.'

The report is a 'smoking gun' in terms of revelations about the sources of crime guns and the failure of gun control. Apparently anti-gun owner politicians and police chiefs do not want the public to know the truth as they campaign against the so-called 'gun show loophole'. Now it's time for the IACP leadership, police officials, and political leaders to acknowledge that gun laws don't stop criminals, that they only restrict the rights of law-abiding citizens, and that gun shows are not the 'arms bazaars for criminals' as they have been portrayed.

The FBI's website says that 'Violent Encounters: Felonious Assaults on America's Law Enforcement Officers' is available from the Uniform Crime Reporting Program Office, FBI Complex, 1000 Custer Hollow Road, Clarksburg, WV 26306-0150 or by calling 888-827-6427


8-Ball
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 10:25 pm

Well said.

We all have the inalienable right to defend our lives wherever we happen to be.

It is well documented that the bad guys don't obey gun laws either. It is laughable that anyone would expect that they would.


Michael Z. Williamson
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 10:55 pm

This implies that it's worse to kill a gay than anyone else. Is there such a thing as a “love” crime? Murder is murder, regardless of the victim's demographics. Let's not be bigoted about it.


Michael Z. Williamson
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 10:56 pm

Yes, because every newspaper carries stories of the hundreds of gays shot by CCW holders.

Oh, wait, no they don't.

Because it doesn't happen.

I D I O T


Michael Z. Williamson
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 11:00 pm

And the first time the chip malfunctions and someone can't use their gun, the manufacturer IS liable. They're no more liable for misuse than Ford is for speeding.

And I have functional guns in my collection over a century old. About 30 of them. They shoot ammo available at any sporting goods store. So wishes aside, guns aren't going away.


Michael Z. Williamson
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 11:04 pm

http://www.lrainc.com/swtaboo/stalkers/em_homos… or you could use google and find this.

As to it being a “preference,” when was the point where you thought to yourself, “Hmm..Bruce and Karen are both hot, but I think I'm going to stick to Karen”?


Michael Z. Williamson
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 11:06 pm

Wow. What a fantasy you have. Seeing as handguns have been available for FIVE HUNDRED YEARS. For some reason (see FBI study quoted above), criminals don't tend to worry about little niceties like laws.

Want some chocolate topping with that FAIL sundae?


Iman Azol
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 11:08 pm

Well, Dead Parrot, SCOTUS and 48 states say I have a right to own and carry a gun. You oppose my civil rights. That means you belong to a hate group.

Say hello to the Klan for me–they're the ones who pushed for gun control in the late 1800s, to stop those uppity blacks from objecting to the free speech of cross burning.


Iman Azol
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 11:09 pm

How odd. I'm a republican, currently IMing with a transsexual friend and a black business associate. Oops! Did I just admit that out loud? Shame on me. I expect they'll kick me out of the party tomorrow.


Iman Azol
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 11:12 pm

I welcome that future. I also hope that racist and bigoted Democrats like yourself are dead, and your offspring have had some education and awareness to renew the Democratic base on something besides greed, whining and government-sponsored payoffs of failing corporations.


Michael Z. Williamson
Comment posted June 9, 2009 @ 11:12 pm

Please cite a situation where that has happened.


Henry Bowman
Comment posted June 10, 2009 @ 2:06 am

Uh huh. Hate crimes legislation currently covers any attack based on race… except in the real world, where it doesn't. Same as voting literacy tests covered any voter regardless of race… except in the real world where only blacks were ever turned away.


AtlanticBeach
Comment posted June 10, 2009 @ 2:38 am

Any attack on any race? Are you high? Hate crimes are designed for anyone who calls themselves a “minority.” They were enacted in response to what minorities called unfair treatment in sentencing. They were specifically created so that a white man would do the “same time” as a black man. They are solely based on race. Who's the idiot now? Dumbass.


ATST
Comment posted June 10, 2009 @ 2:45 am

You sir, are a complete and total dumbass. You figured out our horrible “secret” agenda, bravo. Everything is a conspiracy to create more white babies to combat reckless fucking in the ghettos. Don't take your anger out on those who care enough to prevent the death of innocents. And yes, no one should be able to protect themselves from anyone who is a criminal. Drop race from the equation, moron, and the 2nd amendment makes a lot of sense. Dumbass.


France Sucks
Comment posted June 10, 2009 @ 2:49 am

You are correct, because it's worth your time and effort to use diplomacy while being beaten. Reasoning with your attackers works really well, just ask any crime victim (who isn't dead). Newsflash: the cops are around to clean up messes, not to prevent them. You have to protect yourself. The benevolent state cannot protect you unless you have a cop in your pocket at all times. Why do idiot liberals think it is morally superior to be a victim of a crime than to arm yourself and protect your family?


Kiki is an Idiot
Comment posted June 10, 2009 @ 2:53 am

Yes, with tougher gun control, you can erase all crime…. or will you just be harming the law abiding citizen? Wait, I'm confused. If criminals don't obey the laws, and you have tougher gun laws, won't the criminals just ignore those laws? Won't you be in the same boat, only now Regular Joe can't defend his family? Nah, your fantasy view will make the criminals “see the light” and magically start obeying the laws. Good point of view, moron.


Dream World
Comment posted June 10, 2009 @ 3:09 am

Tougher gun control? Do you think criminals care about laws? Tougher laws will only harm those that obey laws.


Happier Times
Comment posted June 10, 2009 @ 3:16 am

Have you ever been robbed? I had an african American gentleman shove a gun in my face. He took my money and threatened my life. Since I was working at a book store, the police arrived 7 minutes after I tripped the alarm (amazing timing). The only problem was that if this thug had pulled the trigger, the cops would've been 7 minutes too late (assuming the criminal tripped the alarm). While cops do a fantastic job of cleaning up messes, they cannot prevent crime unless they are literally between the criminal and the victim. Even then, how many cops fall victim to criminals?
I was lucky once, but luck doesn't last forever. All it takes is for 1 idiot to end your life. That's why you have to protect yourself. Tougher gun control will lead to me not being able to protect my family when it matter most.


Umm
Comment posted June 10, 2009 @ 3:42 am

It's funny how you use quotes around “same time” as if we didn't live in a period where white men weren't getting the same time for the same crime. In fact, they still don't in some parts of the country.

You're correct and where the law CAME from and what it was designed for. But a little reasearch (even on the internet) can draw cases of black on white hate cases.


Umm
Comment posted June 10, 2009 @ 4:00 am

This story was irrelevant because I don't accept the premise that “most murders use the gunshow loophole to get their guns to kill cops”. And if I don't accept that premise, there's nothing to prove wrong. In fact, as someone who works in Democratic politics, that is never a line i've heard anyone use. We'd call this base paste: It's going to stick really well with anti-gun control people, but try to spin it for the average voters, they couldn't give a care. There's a REALLY big reason why this issue is so hotly divisive today…because there has been NO conclusive evidence on either side of the issue. And why is that? Because each state/city/county/country has a different set of circumstances that no study can predict for and generalize to another region or even time in the same place (not far in the future at least).

You'll be hard pressed to convince me that you can't buy your guns from a gun store. If Jimmy Bob wants to run a side business selling guns then he needs to follow the same regulations as those who do it for a full time career (even though most of the Jimmy Bob's ARE doing it full time but lie to better position themselves for sales).

Not only was I raised in a house with guns, I own guns. I've never bought a gun from a gun show. Never needed to.


Umm
Comment posted June 10, 2009 @ 4:14 am

Hahah. No. I just don't spend all day long trolling on terrible newspaper websites.


DaProf
Comment posted June 10, 2009 @ 4:44 am

I'm calling B.S. on ya, Umm. You didn't even bother to check out the PDF with the cited studies and stats. I can see your mind is closed and nobody is answering the knock on the temple.

You also need to brush up on your Alinsky tactics…you are failing on #12 and are weak when it comes to #5.
Welcome to my “iggy list”, since you didn't come to the discussion to talk, but to foment. Do that with zits too, I bet (See, that's #5.)

—-
As for the topic: see where folks talked about it before at http://gaylife.about.com/b/2006/09/28/should-ga… The commentators there make a good point that carrying guns isn't about being gay. It is about protecting oneself. And that perhaps a gay person has one more reason than others to be concerned about attack.

Now, if you were a short fat black gay jew wearing thick lensed glasses, you probably have even more reasons to worry about small minded people.

And CCW reciprocity is a good thing. I hated driving north up I-95 and having to take my firearm out of the console, unload it and stick it in a box in the trunk just to go through South Carolina legally (until recent legislation in S.C. changed that. see: http://handgunlaw.us/ )

It just is “politics as usual” when those in Washington attach unrelated riders/earmarks/amendments to bills.

———
“Someone ever tries to kill you, you try to kill 'em right back! “- Capt Mal, Firefly


Umm
Comment posted June 10, 2009 @ 11:12 am

With all due respect…what would you have done with a gun. I know that sounds like a ridiculous question, but seriously. I’m assuming the suspect didn’t tell you he was going to pull a gun, count to 3 and then put it in your face. I’m assuming he pulled it out pointed it right at your face and asked for what he wanted. Would your next move would have been to reach in to your pocket and pull out a gun? I would put every dime I own on you getting shot if that was the move you made. While i understand the IDEA behind protecting yourself. There are some situations where it seems impractical.

When it comes to home, I understand that. Hearing an intruder can give you time to get your gun and protect your family.

I obviously don’t know your story, so if I have my facts wrong, feel free to correct me.


Umm
Comment posted June 10, 2009 @ 11:13 am

No they only do that for voting in Democratic primaries….and that IS true.


GOP proposes Gays with Guns Amendment to the Shepard Hate Crimes Bill - Lez Get Real
Pingback posted June 10, 2009 @ 1:04 pm

[...] Read the whole story: Washington Independent [...]


doug
Comment posted June 11, 2009 @ 3:43 am

wow, left meets right, huh?


Pro-gun gay groups look for to augment nationwide CCW reciprocity to Kennedy’s ‘resist crimes’ tabulation | Fishing Blog
Pingback posted June 12, 2009 @ 12:25 am

[...] from the Washington Insider, "Joined month after successfully tucking an alteration compensate into the faithfulness card [...]


guy
Comment posted June 12, 2009 @ 1:31 am

titanium handguns ,lightweight for the limp-wristed


Young Americans for Liberty » Blog Archive » A national concealed carry law? Maybe not quite as awesome as it sounds.
Pingback posted June 12, 2009 @ 2:37 pm

[...] as a necessary defense for those who might be subject to hate crimes. The Washington Independent reports: One month after successfully tucking an amendment into the credit card reform bill that expanded [...]


MrBenchley
Comment posted June 16, 2009 @ 2:07 pm

Worth noting that the Pink Pistols used to have a link on their website linking to the right wing libertarian who created them chortling about how their “cognitive dissonance” is a “good trick on liberals” (see, there are guns and there are gay people, and…uh, that's it).

The Pink Pistols enemies list contains Barney Frank but not Fred Phelps, Barbra Streisand but not James Dobson. The group routinely endorses anti-gay politicans, and tried to disrupt a gay pride march in Ohio some years ago. I suppose if you were deaf, dumb and blind and had someone dishonestly describe what's on their website, you might believe that's a real gay group.


MrBenchley
Comment posted June 16, 2009 @ 2:14 pm

Worth noting that the Pink Pistols used to have a link on their website linking to the right wing libertarian who created them chortling about how their “cognitive dissonance” is a “good trick on liberals” (see, there are guns and there are gay people, and…uh, that's it).

The Pink Pistols enemies list contains Barney Frank but not Fred Phelps, Barbra Streisand but not James Dobson. The group routinely endorses anti-gay politicians, and tried to disrupt a gay pride march in Ohio some years ago. I suppose if you were deaf, dumb and blind and had someone dishonestly describe what's on their website, you might believe that's a real gay group.


MrBenchley
Comment posted June 16, 2009 @ 9:09 pm

By the way, lazercat..wonder why Gwen Patton failed to mention what might happen if the gay person toting a gun was being followed by gay bashers toting guns? And doesn’t her idiotic organization encourage gay bashers to be armed with guns?


MrBenchley
Comment posted June 16, 2009 @ 9:12 pm

Just like the loony in Arkansas who shot those soldiers!

Good thought, A.J. (NOT)


MrBenchley
Comment posted June 16, 2009 @ 9:07 pm

Worth noting that the Pink Pistols used to have a link on their website linking to the right wing libertarian who created them chortling about how their “cognitive dissonance” is a “good trick on liberals” (see, there are guns and there are gay people, and…uh, that's it).

The Pink Pistols enemies list contains Barney Frank but not Fred Phelps, Barbra Streisand but not James Dobson. The group routinely endorses anti-gay politicans, and tried to disrupt a gay pride march in Ohio some years ago. I suppose if you were deaf, dumb and blind and had someone dishonestly describe what's on their website, you might believe that's a real gay group.


MrBenchley
Comment posted June 16, 2009 @ 9:14 pm

Worth noting that the Pink Pistols used to have a link on their website linking to the right wing libertarian who created them chortling about how their “cognitive dissonance” is a “good trick on liberals” (see, there are guns and there are gay people, and…uh, that's it).

The Pink Pistols enemies list contains Barney Frank but not Fred Phelps, Barbra Streisand but not James Dobson. The group routinely endorses anti-gay politicians, and tried to disrupt a gay pride march in Ohio some years ago. I suppose if you were deaf, dumb and blind and had someone dishonestly describe what's on their website, you might believe that's a real gay group.


EckerNet.Com » Blog Archive » Deep Thoughts With Kevin
Pingback posted June 19, 2009 @ 2:47 am

[...] Interesting…gay groups are joining up with Second Amendment groups to promote reciprocity for carrying a concealed weapon.  Nice to see there are people that understand that arming potential victims is a good thing. [...]


tyler12
Comment posted June 22, 2009 @ 11:45 pm

Thats a great Idea! It should be a law for every Citizen over the age of 18 to carry a weapon. One might be amazed at how respectfull we are to eachother, one might think twice before making a backhanded comment, or stealing some one's car, or breaking into some one's home gay or not.


Ed_Pell
Comment posted June 23, 2009 @ 12:12 pm

Boy o boy, that is “freedom” gun-nut-style…everybody has to tote a phallic toy, and any disagreement has a chance to become lethal.


tyler12
Comment posted June 23, 2009 @ 3:18 pm

What's the difference between having a disagreement face to face or car to car on the freeway? The vehicle is just as deadly as the .357.
Disagreements would go back to the way they were settled, hand to hand combat. The weapon is intended to only be used as means to protect life, liberty, and property against any enemy foreign or domestic.


Ed_Pell
Comment posted June 23, 2009 @ 7:12 pm

Really…that's your argument? That it would be as much fun to shoot someone as to run over them?

And shooting someone with a gun isn't hand-to-hand combat.

“he weapon is intended to only be used as means to protect life, liberty, and property against any enemy foreign or domestic.”
And when it isn't used for that, as it almost never is here in America, we can all pout and posture, like you do.


CC provision in hate crimes legislation. - XDTalk Forums - Your HS2000/SA-XD Information Source!
Pingback posted June 23, 2009 @ 8:55 pm

[...] words, if you flash your "gay card," your CWP will have automatic reciprocity in other states. Pro-Gun Gay Groups Take Aim at Hate Crimes Bill | The Washington Independent Something like that. Despite being a homophobe, I believe GLBT people are protected by the second [...]


tyler12
Comment posted June 23, 2009 @ 8:46 pm

I'm sorry I thought you were literate. No where was fun mentioned. No where was hand to hand combat insinuated as using a weapon of any kind (hence the words hand to hand). The second amendment is the exact reason why America doesn't have the same problems as major portions of the rest of the world.


Ed_Pell
Comment posted June 23, 2009 @ 9:37 pm

I'm sorry, I thought you could remember from post to post what sort of gibberish you were spouting.

“The second amendment is the exact reason why America doesn't have the same problems as major portions of the rest of the world.”

Only if you consider” low levels of gun violence” a problem. The UK, with 60 million people and gun control, has less gun violence than a moderate-sized American city like Birmingham, AL, with 600,000 and next to no gun control. Americans get shot at third world rates because a bunch of neurotics can't accept common sense restrictions on their crappy little hobby.


tyler12
Comment posted June 23, 2009 @ 10:06 pm

I have a loaded fire extinguisher under my sink in the kitchen in case of the event of a fire, I have a loaded pistol in the bedroom in the event my family is in danger. I do not hunt I have no need to hunt. Gun related crimes are numbers of dead law abiding people not the criminal that shot them, that's why they are called “violent gun crimes” understand that words mean things. Law abiding people don't go running around killing schools full of children, or rob banks, or break into peoples homes. With your gun control you disarm the law abiding leaving only the criminal armed. When seconds count the cops are minutes away.


Ed_Pell
Comment posted June 23, 2009 @ 10:15 pm

30,000 Americans aren;'t killed each year by fire extinguishers, tyler.

“I have a loaded pistol in the bedroom in the event my family is in danger.”
Thus putting them in danger. Gun owners like yourself are 44 times more likely to perforate themselves, their family or their friends than they ever are a criminal. And gun owners lose at least FOUR guns to criminals for every one a cop or anyone else uses to stop a crime.

“Law abiding people don't go running around killing schools full of children, or rob banks, or break into peoples homes.”
But loonies with guns do that all the time. And neurotics who can't accept restrictions on their crappy little hobby help them do it.


tyler12
Comment posted June 23, 2009 @ 10:34 pm

No of course not they die in the fire.

“loonies with guns”? are you telling me that loonies with guns are going to abide by gun laws?

44 times more likely to have accidental shootings are mostly caused simply because the parents didn't train their children how to use a firearm. Have you no concept of personal responsibility?

“Stolen guns” now that's just a bad deal, however whether a criminal steals a gun from a gun owner or buys one in the alley they are still going to acquire them illegally, not apply for a permit to carry or submit finger prints. Don't treat the law abiding like criminals. Fight fire with fire. The only restrictions you speak of are only relative to the law abiding.


Ed_Pell
Comment posted June 24, 2009 @ 11:33 am

Well, you do get sillier and sillier.

“44 times more likely to have accidental shootings”
No, they aren't. Most shootings are deliberate. But the attempt at a red herring is especially lame.

“”Stolen guns” now that's just a bad deal, however whether a criminal steals a gun from a gun owner or buys one in the alley they are still going to acquire them illegally,”
Which is why neurotics like you do all they can to help them do it.

“Don't treat the law abiding like criminals. “
So don't break gun control laws, dummy.

“The only restrictions you speak of are only relative to the law abiding.”
Yeah, that's true of ALL LAWS. Laws against bank robberies don't hamper criminals, who are then punished for their criminal behavior.


tyler12
Comment posted June 24, 2009 @ 5:38 pm

“Don't treat the law abiding like criminals. “
“So don't break gun control laws, dummy.”
WTF this makes no sense. If someone, is law abiding where is the law broken?

“Neurotic” a mentally instable person…really? do all that we can to help criminals?

Ok your out in left field some place. I'm always up for a good debate but you have done nothing but read things into posts that weren't written, thrown statistics at me which doesn't amount to a hill of beans and done a bunch of name calling. I have not attacked you personally, I have only attacked your ideology. The only way I'm willing to continue this is if you come up with a real good solution, you don't think it should be a law that everyone be armed and I don't think it should be a law that no one be armed. You say that people that have guns are basically insane and they are just helping the criminals. All this sounds like is fear and unable to think of anyone other than yourself. I don't know what your going to do when freedom of speech becomes illegal and you cant hold up your sign to protest. Guns were used to create this country its going to take guns to keep this country thats why the constitution doenst have an exiration date. the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Period the end. Says nothing about hunting which you refer to as a crappy hobbie, well let me tell you my friend hunting is a means for survival where I come from. The second Amendment is for the people to have the right to stand against tyranny, and when in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.


Ed_Pell
Comment posted June 24, 2009 @ 5:50 pm

Patriotism IS the last refuge of scoundrels, it seems.

“You say that people that have guns are basically insane and they are just helping the criminals. All this sounds like is fear and unable to think of anyone other than yourself.”
Sobs the guy who claims that everyone has to have a popgun like he does, because he's terrfied.

“Guns were used to create this country”
And not just any guns, but collectively owned guns at that.

“its going to take guns to keep this country”
Yeah, we can tell by the loonies at gun shows who wave swastikas and want to overthrow the U.S.

“the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Period the end. “
Of course, you left off the beginning of the Second Amendment. But then that's typical gun nut dishonesty.

And it's hilarious that after prattling witlessly about the Constitution, the prose you ham-handedly quoted is NOT the Constitution.


Jeremy
Comment posted July 11, 2009 @ 5:13 am

You seem to think believing in the 2nd Amendment automatically makes someone a Republican. This amuses me the libertarian.


Pro-Gun Gay Groups Take Aim at Hate Crimes Bill
Pingback posted July 15, 2009 @ 2:28 am

[...] Pro-Gun Gay Groups Take Aim at Hate Crimes Bill Posted in link [...]


man
Comment posted September 4, 2009 @ 4:40 pm

great article, i really appreciate it


Wolfprophet
Comment posted September 16, 2009 @ 2:59 am

Well, it works pretty well in Switzerland you damn hippie. And has since before guns were even invented. So I'd be all for arming everyone.
Although, where do you get off calling them Phallic toys? Guns have been around since before you ever lived, before America was a country and all they've done is get smaller and smaller. If we toted guns the size of a Blunderbuss, then you can call them penis extensions. I happen to own an M44 carbine though. It is not a big weapon. It is a powerful weapon. It will not pierce body armor. It does have a bayonet. These features make it fine for hunting or for home defense. Or for spearing and/or picking off at distance, limp wristed little pansies like you and the rest of the liberals from the People's Republik of Commiefornia.


Ed_Pell
Comment posted September 16, 2009 @ 1:14 pm

It's fun to see that gun loonies scour the internet looking for months-old blasphemies against their sacred fetish.

And even more fun to see a guy who demonstrates he has serious gender issues of his own screeching that he doesn't think his phallic toy is a phallic toy.

There's no better argument for gun control than watching a guy with a Nazi nickname ranting about “limp wristed little pansies like you and the rest of the liberals from the People's Republik of Commiefornia.”


lololololhaha
Comment posted November 25, 2009 @ 9:47 am

LMAO


JimBowlushi
Comment posted November 25, 2009 @ 11:02 am

So this only allows for gays to carry? Isn't that a bit in the other direction of non-discrimination.


JimBowlushi
Comment posted November 25, 2009 @ 11:04 am

guy 5 months ago
titanium handguns ,lightweight for the limp-wristed

HAHAHAHHAHAHA


lololololhaha
Comment posted November 25, 2009 @ 2:47 pm

LMAO


JimBowlushi
Comment posted November 25, 2009 @ 4:02 pm

So this only allows for gays to carry? Isn't that a bit in the other direction of non-discrimination.


JimBowlushi
Comment posted November 25, 2009 @ 4:04 pm

guy 5 months ago
titanium handguns ,lightweight for the limp-wristed

HAHAHAHHAHAHA


GIVEMEFREEDOM
Comment posted April 12, 2010 @ 4:58 pm

What a crappy way to argue the second amendment, that's like sleeping with a whore to promote abstinence.


mbt shoes
Comment posted May 10, 2010 @ 12:36 am

DO you like it?


mbt sandals
Comment posted June 2, 2010 @ 2:41 pm

Thank you for your sharing.I'm very interested in it!


mbt sandals
Comment posted June 2, 2010 @ 4:09 pm

so cool!


jordan shoes
Comment posted June 9, 2010 @ 8:22 am

Let us at the top of the information!


nike running shoes
Comment posted July 11, 2010 @ 2:51 am

[url=http://www.nikeairmaxshoe.com/womens-air-max-ltd-c-9_11.html][b]Women's Air Max LTD[/b][/url] on sale,[url=http://www.nikeairmaxshoe.com/mens-air-max-ltd-c-9_10.html][b]Men's Air Max LTD[/b][/url] Shoes was introduced in 2002,[url=http://www.nikeairmaxshoe.com/nike-air-max-95-mens-shoes-c-8.html][b]Nike Air Max 95[/b][/url] and [url=http://www.nikeairmaxshoe.com/nike-air-max-95-mens-shoes-c-8.html][b]Nike Basketball shoes[/b][/url] are hot now,[url=http://www.nikeairmaxshoe.com/nike-air-max-2009-c-1.html][b]Nike Air Max 2009[/b][/url] retail for men and women,[url=http://www.mbtshoeslatest.com/nike-running-shoes-c-21.html][b]Nike running shoes[/b][/url] and [url=http://www.mbtshoeslatest.com/][b]mbt shoes[/b][/url] are the latest stock to hit our shores,with more [url=http://www.mbtshoeslatest.com/][b]boots shoes[/b][/url] online,Our nike sneakers like [url=http://www.mbtshoeslatest.com/mens-shox-nz-c-21_17.html][b]Mens Shox NZ[/b][/url] and [url=http://www.mbtshoeslatest.com/womens-shox-nz-c-21_20.html][b]Womens Shox NZ[/b][/url] sale online.Buy Cheap [url=www.jerseysky.com]Football Jerseys[/url] from Sport Jersey's Store, [url=http://www.jerseysky.com/mlb-jersey-c-59.html]Basketball Jerseys[/url], [i][url=http://www.jerseysky.com/nfl-jersey-c-1.html]NFL Jerseys[/url][/i],[url=http://www.jerseysky.com/nhl-jersey-c-38.html]NHL Jerseys[/url], [url=http://www.jerseysky.com/nba-jersey-c-86.html]NBA Jerseys[/url],[url=http://www.jerseysky.com/mlb-jersey-c-59.html]MLB Jerseys[/url],[url=http://www.jerseysky.com/nhl-jersey-c-38.html]Hockey Jerseys[/url],[url=http://www.jerseysky.com/nfl-jersey-c-1.html]Cheap [i]NFL Jerseys[/i][/url],[url=http://www.jerseysky.com/nfl-jersey-c-1.html]Wholesale [i]NFL Jerseys[/i][/url].
You may need Summer Equipment,Have a good summer holiday:Many kind of Brand [url=http://www.cheapsaleing.com/sunglass-c-16.html]Sunglsss Cheap [/url],[url=http://www.cheapsaleing.com/brand-shoes-puma-shoes-c-5_54.html]Puma Shoes Cheap[/url],[url=http://www.cheapsaleing.com/brand-shoes-converse-shoes-c-5_15.html]Converse Shoes Cheap[/url],[url=http://www.cheapsaleing.com/shox-shoes-mens-shox-nz-c-5_7_8.html]Nike Shox Shoes Cheap [/url].


nike running shoes
Comment posted July 11, 2010 @ 3:00 am

Buy Cheap Football Jerseys from Sport Jersey's Store, Basketball Jerseys, NFL Jerseys,NHL Jerseys, NBA Jerseys,MLB Jerseys,Hockey Jerseys,Cheap NFL Jerseys,Wholesale NFL Jerseys
Cowboys cheap jerseys Steelers cheap jerseys Saints cheap jerseys Vikings cheap jerseys Raiders cheap jerseysYou may need Summer Equipment,Have a good summer holiday:Many kind of Brand Sunglsss ,Puma Shoes,Converse Shoes,Nike Shox Shoes .

Women's Air Max LTD on sale,Men's Air Max LTD Shoes was introduced in 2002,Nike Air Max 95 and Nike Basketball shoes are hot now,Nike Air Max 2009 retail for men and women,Nike running shoes and mbt shoes are the latest stock to hit our shores,with more boots shoes online,Our nike sneakers like Mens Shox NZ and Womens Shox NZ sale online.


Wankui2010
Comment posted July 24, 2010 @ 2:10 am

I dont like Obama , he not do as he says.
http://www.jerseysky.com


louis vuitton handbags
Comment posted August 6, 2010 @ 8:44 am

I dont like Obama , he not do as he says.


National Concealed Carry Law possible? |
Pingback posted August 13, 2010 @ 1:24 pm

[...] the Washington Independent: One month after successfully tucking an amendment into the credit card reform bill that expanded [...]


Coulter at HomoCon:Gay Conservative Discussion
Pingback posted September 26, 2010 @ 11:41 pm

[...] Sen. John Thune (R-SD) on a failed amendment to last year’s federal hate crimes bill that would have allowed gun owners to carry concealed weapons over state lines and their work with Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) on what he termed a “free market [...]


air max shoes
Comment posted November 10, 2010 @ 2:57 pm

Air max shoes manufactory is lied in the city which is general headquarters producing base of China of Nike Air Max Company-Putian of Fujian . We can supply all kinds of Nike Air max shoes (Air Max 90,air max light,nike air structure triax 91,air max 180,air max tn,air max skyline,air max 360,air max 24-7,air max 2011,air max 93,air max 89).The products have sold well in many places,such as America, Europe,Middle East, southest, etc.Warmly welcome customers from home and abroad ,contact us by phone,e-mail and on line negotiating.


Sinema izle
Trackback posted January 22, 2011 @ 5:49 pm

Visit this blog…

Blogroll links aint that perfect :P but i am not the admin… :P … Just Telling :P :D…


nordstrom prom dresses
Trackback posted May 17, 2011 @ 9:56 pm

nordstrom dresses…

I was curious if you ever thought of changing the page layout of your site? Its very well written; I love what youve got to say. But maybe you could a little more in the way of content so people could connect with it better. Youve got an awful lot of t…


Coach Outlet Online
Comment posted June 29, 2011 @ 12:56 am

I don’t know. I love Coach Outlet Online Store, I was in Chelsea the happiest man since the arrival of a person who should have never Prada Shoes. I was thinking I would have Coach Outlet be there all my life and a few months later, I buy Coach Purses. So you never know. In Inter I found an incredible family. Players; amazing. President; amazing. Then after two years I felt, even with two more years Coach Purses Outlet, I felt it was over. I need something new for me. So you never know. But when I sign a Coach Factory Outlet, I sign with the intention to respect the contract and be happy for that Prada Sneakers. So if everything goes in the right direction, yes I will stay Coach Outlet Store.


used car dealerships
Trackback posted August 22, 2011 @ 4:08 am

Auto Auctions…

Howdy, i read your blog occasionally and i own a similar one and i was just wondering if you get a lot of spam responses? If so how do you reduce it, any plugin or anything you can advise? I get so much lately it’s driving me insane so any support is …


oakland car auction
Trackback posted August 23, 2011 @ 12:22 pm

Auctions…

I’m truly enjoying the design and layout of your site. It’s a very easy on the eyes which makes it much more enjoyable for me to come here and visit more often. Did you hire out a designer to create your theme? Fantastic work!…


4221216
Comment posted September 7, 2011 @ 12:56 pm

4221216 beers on the wall. sck was here


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.